"Freedom of expression is a cornerstone of

British democracy"

I'm still reeling at what the Met did on Saturday evening. Their completely disproportionate behaviour brought to my attention a wide-ranging Bill that was debated in parliament today that I'm ashamed I hadn't really taken on board before: the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill 2021 which "will allow the police to take a more proactive approach in managing highly disruptive protests causing serious disruption to the public". (It is the Home Secretary who has the power to define 'disruptive' and most of us know how very draconian the title 'Home Secretary' makes even previously reasonable politicians.) "This will enable the police to make use of their powers with the confidence that they are doing so legally."

Just to be clear: Saturday evening was not disruptive. It was quiet and respectful until the police 'made use of their powers'.

This new bill, of course, is not aimed at people grieving a woman murdered by (allegedly) a police officer, but at XR as it already is and probably also at Black Lives Matter as they fear it could become. This text from the policy paper is a bit of a giveaway: "Conduct captured will include nuisances such as producing excessive noise (ah, noise - that's the magnificent Brighton Samba Band. I wonder whether it also includes our singing) or smells (eh? the great unwashed?) or offensive or dangerous behaviour in public, such as hanging from bridges."

Within XR we have anguished discussions about how disruptive we should be. A protest that alienates the public and obstructs ambulances is obviously counter-productive. But a protest that affects no-one is useless. What to do? During Covid, we have been very creative about devising protests that comply with legislation, including social distancing. One such is the forthcoming 'Rebellion of One'. So I suppose it shouldn't have been a surprise to find that this bill "will broaden the range of circumstances in which the police can impose conditions on protests, including a single person protest".

Although the government policy paper on the bill says that "freedom of expression is a cornerstone of British democracy" it is exactly that which is under attack. The new offence of “residing on land without consent" is not only explicitly aimed at Gypsies and Travellers but would also prohibit tents in Whitehall. Wide-ranging indeed.

So today I met a few others in Bonn Square with my placard to object to this bill. Two police officers turned up, asked a few questions and went away again. None of us was within two metres of anyone else (as my main picture makes clear) and they were probably aware that if they'd objected to us standing still we could simply all have taken our daily exercise walking round the square. Which might actually have been more effective. I must remember to suggest that idea to my group.

See the extra for how the camera can lie about social distancing.


A deal: I'd be prepared to comply with these constraints if the government would legislate and act effectively on the highly disruptive consequences of climate change, of racism, of inequality and of social injustice. That's a fair trade, no?